FaceTrack:%20Tracking%20and%20summarizing%20faces%20from%20compressed%20video - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Title: FaceTrack:%20Tracking%20and%20summarizing%20faces%20from%20compressed%20video


1
FaceTrack Tracking and summarizing faces from
compressed video

• Hualu Wang, Harold S. Stone, Shih-Fu Chang
• Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Columbia
  University
• NEC Research Institute

Presentation by Andy Rova School of Computing
Science Simon Fraser University
2
Introduction

• FaceTrack
• System for both tracking and summarizing faces in
  compressed video data
• Tracking
• Detect faces and trace them through time in video
  shots
• Summarizing
• Cluster the faces across video shots and
  associate them with different people
• Compressed video
• Avoids the costly overhead of decoding prior to
  face detection

3
System Overview

• The FaceTrack systems goals are related to ideas
  discussed in previous presentations
• A face-based video summary can help users decide
  if they want to download the whole video
• The summary provides good visual indexing
  information for a database search engine

4
Problem definition

• The goal of the FaceTrack system is to take an
  input video sequence and generate a list of
  prominent faces that appear in the video, and
  determine the time periods where each of the
  faces appears

5
General Approach

• Track faces within shots
• Once tracking is done, group faces across video
  shots into faces of different people
• Output a list of faces for each sequence
• For each face, list shots where it appears, and
  when
• Face recognition is not performed
• Very difficult in unconstrained videos due to the
  broad range of face sizes, numbers, orientations
  and lighting conditions

6
General Approach

• Try to work in the compressed domain as much as
  possible
• MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 videos
• Used in applications such as digital TV and DVD
• Macroblocks and motion vectors can be used
  directly in tracking
• Greater computational speed compared to decoding
• Can always decode select frames down to the pixel
  level for further analysis
• For example, grouping faces across shots

7
MPEG Review

• 3 types of frame data
• Intra-frames (I-frames)
• Forward predictive frames (P-frames)
• Bidirectional predictive frames (B-frames)
• Macroblocks are coding units which combine pixel
  information via DCT
• Luminance and chrominance are separated
• P-frames and B-frames are subjected to motion
  compensation
• Motion vectors are found and their differences
  are encoded

8
System Diagram
9
Face Tracking

• Challenges
• Locations of detected faces may not be accurate,
  since the face detection algorithm works on 16x16
  macroblocks
• False alarms and misses
• Multiple faces cause ambiguities when they move
  close to each other
• The motion approximated by the MPEG motion
  vectors may not be accurate
• A tracking framework which can handle these
  issues in the compressed domain is needed

10
The Kalman Filter

• A linear, discrete-time dynamic system is defined
  by the following difference equations
• We only have access to a sequence of measurements
  
• Given this noisy observation data, the problem is
  to find the optimal estimate of the unknown
  system state variables

11
The Kalman Filter

• The filter is actually an iterative algorithm
  which keeps taking in new observations
• The new states are successively estimated
• The error of the prediction of is called the
  innovation
• The innovation is amplified by a gain matrix and
  used as a correction for the state prediction
• The corrected prediction is the new state estimate

12
The Kalman Filter

• In the FaceTrack system, the state vector of
  the Kalman filter is the kinematic information of
  the face
• position, velocity (and sometimes acceleration)
• The observation vector is the position of
  the detected face
• May not be accurate
• The Kalman filter lets the system predict and
  update the position and parameters of the faces

13
The Kalman Filter

• The FaceTrack system uses a 0.1 second time
  interval for state updates
• This corresponds to every I-frame and P-frame for
  typical MPEG GOP structure
• GOP Group Of Pictures frame structure
• For example, IBBPBBP

14
The Kalman Filter

• For I-frames, the face detector results are used
  directly
• For P-frames, the face detector results are more
  prone to false alarms
• Instead, P-frame face locations are predicted
  based on the MPEG motion vectors (approximately)
• These locations are then fed into the Kalman
  filter as observations
• (in contrast with previous trackers, which
  assumed that the motion-vector calculated
  locations were correct alone)

15
The Face Tracking Framework

• How to discriminate new faces from previous ones
  during tracking?
• The Mahalanobis distance is a quantitative
  indicator of how close the new observation is to
  the prediction
• This can help separate new faces from existing
  tracks if the Mahalanobis distance is greater
  than a certain threshold, then the newly detected
  face is unlikely to belong to a particular
  existing track

16
The Face Tracking Framework

• In the case where two faces move close together,
  Mahalanobis distance alone cannot keep track of
  multiple faces
• Case where a face is missed or occluded
• Hypothesize the continuation of the face track
• Case of false alarm or faces close together
• Hypothesize creation of a new track
• The idea is to wait for new observation data
  before making the final decision about a track

17
Intra-shot Tracking Challenges

• Multiple hypothesis method

18
Kalman Motion Models

• The Kalman filter is a framework which can model
  different types of motion, depending on the
  system matrices used
• Several models were tested for the paper, with
  varying results
• Intuition who pays to research object tracking?
• The military!
• Hence many tracking models are based on
  trajectories that are unlike those that faces in
  video will likely exhibit
• For example, in most commercial video, a human
  face will not maneuver like a jet or missile

19
Kalman Motion Models

• Four motion models were tested for FaceTrack
• Constant Velocity (CV)
• Constant Acceleration (CA)
• Correlated Acceleration (AA)
• Variable Dimension (VDF)
• The testing was done against ground truth
  consisting of manually identified face centers in
  each frame

20
Kalman Motion Models

• Rather than go through the whole process in exact
  detail, the next several slides are an
  illustration of the differences between the CV
  and CA models
• Also, the matrices are expanded to show how the
  states are updated

21
Constant Velocity (CV) Model
22
Constant Velocity (CV) Model
simplify
23
Constant Velocity (CV) Model
simplify
24
Constant Acceleration (CA) Model
Acceleration is now added to the state vector,
and is explicitly modeled as constants disturbed
by random noises
25
Constant Acceleration (CA) Model
26
The Correlated Acceleration Model

• Replaces constant accelerations with a AR(1)
  model
• AR(1) First order autoregressive
• A stochastic process where the immediately
  previous value has an effect on the current value
  (plus some random noise)
• Why?
• There is a strong negative autocorrelation
  between the accelerations of consecutive frames
• Positive accelerations tend to be followed by
  negative accelerations
• Implies that faces tend to stabilize

27
The Variable Dimension Filter

• A system that switches between CV (constant
  velocity) and CA (constant acceleration) modes
• The dimension of the state vector changes when a
  maneuver is detected, hence VDF
• Developed for tracking highly maneuverable
  targets (probably military jets)

28
Comparison of Motion Models
average tracking error
tracking runs (first 16)
29
Comparison of Motion Models

• Why does CV perform best?
• Small sampling interval justifies viewing face
  motion as piecewise linear movements
• The face cannot achieve very high accelerations
  (as opposed to a jet fighter)
• AA also performs well because it fits the nature
  of the face motion well
• Commercial video faces exhibit few persistent
  accelerations (negative autocorrelation)

30
Summarization Across Shots

• Select representative frames for tracked faces
• Large, frontal-view faces are best
• Decode representative frames into the pixel
  domain
• Use clustering algorithms to group the faces into
  different persons
• Make use of domain knowledge
• For example, people do not usually change clothes
  within a news segment, but often do change
  outfits within a sitcom episode

31
Simulation Results
32
Conclusions Future Research

• The FaceTrack is an effective face tracking (and
  summarization) architecture, within which
  different detection and tracking methods can be
  used
• Could be updated to use new face detection
  algorithms or improved motion models
• Based on the results, the CV and AA motion models
  are sufficient for commercial face motion
• Summarization techniques need the most
  development, followed by optimizing tracking for
  adverse situations